Wuthering Heights Adaptation Divides Critics: A Bold Reinvention or a Hollow Misfire?
Emerald Fennell’s much-anticipated cinematic take on Emily Brontë’s enduring gothic masterpiece, Wuthering Heights, has landed with a resounding bang, but whether it’s a triumph or a stumble remains a hotly debated topic among film critics. Starring Margot Robbie as Cathy and Jacob Elordi as Heathcliff, this new adaptation has been met with a sharply divided critical reception, leaving audiences to wonder if Fennell has delivered a faithful reimagining or a sensationalised, superficial reimagining.
Fennell, the visionary director behind the critically acclaimed Saltburn, has approached Brontë’s classic novel with a decidedly loose interpretation. She has openly stated that her aim was to capture her own visceral experience of reading Wuthering Heights as a teenager, a perspective that seems to have informed the film’s audacious and, for some, unsettling tone.
A Tale of Two Reviews: Passionate Praise vs. Scathing Criticism
The critical landscape is split down the middle, with fervent admirers praising the film’s bold stylistic choices and detractors decrying its perceived emotional emptiness.
On one side of the divide, the BBC awarded the film a commendable four stars, highlighting Fennell’s ability to tap into the novel’s core themes. The review noted: “Under it all, Fennell channels something essential in the book – the corrosive behaviour that can result from thwarted desire. Jealousy, anger and vengeance are as natural to Cathy and Heathcliff as their endless passion for each other. If you embrace the film’s audacious style and think of it as a reinvention not an adaptation, this bold, artful Wuthering Heights is utterly absorbing.”
Echoing this sentiment, Robbie Collin of The Telegraph bestowed a perfect five-star rating, labelling the film “resplendently lurid, oozy and wild.” Collin elaborated on the film’s immersive quality, stating: “It’s an obsessive film about obsession, and hungrily embroils the viewer in its own mad compulsions.” He further commented on its provocative nature: “Is it as lewd as Saltburn? I’d say it’s lewder, if slightly less graphic. In some ways, it’s a traditional bodice-ripper – bosoms heave, flanks trickle with sweat – though again, bodily fluids are savoured, while Saltburn’s Alison Oliver makes a devilishly funny and unsettling return as Miss Isabella, Linton’s initially meek and genteel ward.”
However, the praise is far from universal. Peter Bradshaw of The Guardian delivered a more damning verdict, awarding the film a mere two stars. He contended that it “doesn’t have the live-ammo impact” of Fennell’s previous successes, Saltburn and the Oscar-winning Promising Young Woman. Bradshaw’s critique suggested a lack of substance, describing the film as “a luxurious pose of unserious abandon. It’s quasi-erotic, pseudo-romantic and then ersatz-sad, a club night of mock emotion.”
Kevin Maher of The Times also gave the film a two-star rating, expressing disappointment with the “chemistry-free central romance between the bizarrely uninteresting Heathcliff and Cathy.” He lamented the film’s pacing and characterisation, stating: “There are conspicuous longueurs and characterisations that barely reflect the complexity of an Instagram reel let alone the greatest gothic novel in English literature.” Maher was particularly critical of the central performances, describing Robbie’s Cathy as living “entirely on the surface like Bronte Barbie and never burns from the core,” while Elordi’s Heathcliff was a “fatally shallow characterisation,” a “pouty man-candy with a shaky Yorkshire accent and, by chuffing ’eck, an alarmingly overexposed tongue.”
The harshest critique came from Clarisse Loughrey of The Independent, who awarded the film a single star, labelling it “an astonishingly hollow work.” Loughrey argued that the film “uses the guise of interpretation to gut one of the most impassioned, emotionally violent novels ever written, and then toss its flayed skin over whatever romance tropes seem most marketable.”
Loughrey further dissected the portrayal of Heathcliff, observing that he “has become a wet-eyed, Mills & Boon mirage created entirely to induce swooning, always on standby to shield Cathy from the cold and rain. How infinitely dull he is compared to the complicated, challenging figure we meet in the book.” She concluded that while Robbie and Elordi “don’t entirely lack chemistry, but their characters do feel so thinned out that their performances are pushed almost to the border of pantomime. She’s wilful and spiky. He’s rough but gentle. That’s about it.”
This highly polarising adaptation of Wuthering Heights is slated for release in UK cinemas on 13 February, promising to spark further debate among fans of classic literature and modern cinema alike. Whether it will be remembered as a daring reinterpretation or a misguided attempt to modernise a timeless story remains to be seen.
